Air superiority and missile defense are critical to stay ahead of adversary threats and defend the nation. Over the last two years, conflict has escalated in the Middle East and Ukraine, while North Korea and China continue to develop, test, and field advanced aircraft and missile systems. As threats to the U.S. and its allies continue to grow, now is the time to invest in proven, cost-effective air-to-air and surface-to-air integrated deterrence systems.

For example, the Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile, or AMRAAM, is a combat-proven missile that has been kept in production for more than 30 years and it’s only improved with ongoing upgrades. It has also effectively defended Ukraine during the Russia-Ukraine war, reliably achieving near-perfect success rate against targets.

AMRAAM has been procured by the United States Air Force and Navy as well as allies in 43 countries and across 14 distinct platforms, including on the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System, or NASAMS, and all F-35 Joint Strike Fighter variants. Everywhere the U.S. and its allies are flying fighter aircrafts, AMRAAM is deployed.

Amidst heightened domestic and international demand, AMRAAM is the only system producing at mass in this sector, and it will be decades before anything else can match its capability, volume, mass, and inventory. Looking at mounting tensions around the world, it’s clear the luxury of time is running out.

The U.S. needs to capitalize on the good investments already made by the U.S. Government to ensure it has the capacity to continue addressing both emerging and evolving threats.

Forcefully countering the perception these missiles are outdated, legacy AIM-120 B and C missiles have successfully and effectively defended Ukraine against advanced threats for nearly two years, reliably achieving a 90% or higher success rate against targets.

But with dynamic threats and the technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, it is no time to be satisfied with legacy. The AMRAAMs rolling off the production lines today are not the AMRAAMs of decades past. Raytheon is driving new capability into the AMRAAM missile with form, fit and function refresh also known as F3R. Under the F3R program, engineers used model-based systems engineering initiatives and digital technologies to upgrade multiple circuit cards and other hardware in the guidance section of the missile.

The system also receives additional capability with software updates to improve the weapon’s guidance, range and performance, to ensure capability against advanced threats.

Raytheon is on track to field the latest variant, the AMRAAM AIM-120D-3 and AIM-120C-8 over the coming months. Highlighting all AMRAAM customers in the June 2023 $1.15 billion contract, to include Ukraine, will receive this new variant, complementing the existing inventory we’ve been able to provide to them up to this point.

Fears of obsolescence have effectively been turned on their heads. The AMRAAM missiles built today are fundamentally a new and updated product, leveraging significant infrastructure and existing industrial base capacity without the price tag associated with building something from scratch. Raytheon is reinventing what has worked into what is needed for next-generation fighters – and beyond.

None of these technical advancements matter if the military is unable to field weapons at the heightened pace of demand. The conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated stockpiles that were sufficient in times of relative peace will not last through an extended period of active conflict.

The defense industry has worked to strengthen and stabilize supply chains, increase production, and drive efficiencies in its manufacturing process.

As just one example, multiple AMRAAMs are coming off the factory line every single day at a rate higher than ever before.

But to meet future demand, Raytheon needs to secure a commitment from the U.S. government today. The U.S. Government has bet on reliability, ensuring the AMRAAM and other important parts of defensive operations have been available for the U.S. and as an important export to the international allied community. Now it’s time to provide much-needed certainty by signaling to the defense industry that it will be producing critical systems at meaningful rates for years to come – and should continue to invest in the important upgrades to further improve performance.

With multi-year contract commitments, America can be certain it will have the resources to deploy trusted and effective programs wherever and whenever they are needed.

Efforts to counter these UASs have led to the development of sophisticated systems designed for detection, identification, and response. Continuous evolution remains important as adversaries constantly adopt new tactics to attack and even overwhelm defenses. The adaptability and ongoing evolution of Counter-UAS systems remains crucial in keeping up with the ever-changing UAS capabilities. Continuous testing and innovation are both part of the commitment to staying ahead in this intricate battle against small, elusive UAS threats.

To learn more about CUAS and the role they are playing in the current defense landscape, Defense News spoke with Abel Ghanooni, Senior Director of Short Range Air Defense and Rapid Development Programs at Raytheon, an RTX business. Ghanooni leads the company’s Counter-UAS portfolio, including the KuRFS radar and Coyote missile programs.

The transcript of this conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Defense News (DN): What are some of the specific challenges posed by the proliferation of small low-cost UAS threats in recent years, and how are CUAS systems addressing those challenges? Furthermore, how are those threats shaping the thinking around defense?

Abel Ghanooni (AG): These small UASs are and have been proliferating for a number of years now, and we’ve been working very closely with our Army customers to develop and evolve capabilities to combat these threats. They’re small, they’re low-cost, they’re very maneuverable and they’re very easy to deploy without a lot of infrastructure.

Because they’re small, they’re very difficult to detect. We talk about the kill chain, right? Detecting them, identifying them, and launching countermeasures to defeat them. The first step in the kill chain is detecting and identifying and ensuring that they are a threat. Because they’re small, they can hover and maneuver, they can fly low or fly high, you really need those eyes to be able to detect them at long ranges to provide time to decide on the proper countermeasure. So, we talk about the combative – or being able to combat them. We’ve been working with the U.S. Army on a system called LIDS, which is the Low, slow, small-unmanned aircraft Integrated Defense System, for small UASs using Raytheon’s KuRFS radar, which was originally designed to support the counter-RAM mission back in 2013 and essentially repurposed to support the counter-UAS mission. Because it’s in the Ku-band frequency, it has the ability to detect very small objects in the air at very long ranges. It makes it a perfect sensor for this mission set to essentially have eyes in the sky to detect these small UASs.

The other reason they’re very challenging is that these threats can essentially deploy as either singles or as multiples. Fast moving, highly maneuverable UASs – alone or in a swarm – could overwhelm a single defensive system.

When we talk about ground-based air defense or full-spectrum, ground-based air defense, we talk about a layered defense capability. Counter-UAS is just one piece of that layered defense. You’ve got a short-range air defense, a medium-range air defense and a long-range air defense. The ideal solution is a layered defense approach covering the full gamut of ground-based air defense. From a counter-UAS standpoint, it is a dedicated solution for UASs, addressing threats at its own distance within that. With KuRFS, it’s a persistent, 360-degree radar with the necessary precision to detect and identify small, moving, multiple targets at great distances. And, we’ve got our Coyote effector that can handle longer ranges compared to some of the non-kinetic type effectors out there, whether it’s lasers or electronic warfare that can support the closer ranges. And with that range, Coyote can defeat targets – singles and swarms – at a distance, before they get too close or within range to do harm.

DN: That leads us right into our next question – how have the tactics and strategies employed by adversaries using small UAS systems evolved in recent years, and how does that impact the development of counter-UAS systems?

AG: As this kind of threat has proliferated and we’re seeing more of it used across the world, I think the tactics show that adversaries are consistently trying to understand how to better use them. Our job is to stay ahead of that threat, to think three steps ahead: if I had this capability, how would I use it? We’ve gathered some of that information and used it to help evolve and develop our capabilities. An example is with our KuRFS radar, we have the ability to discriminate between biological and non-biological. When we first started out in this mission set, it would be very hard to discriminate between a bird and a quadcopter. We’ve done a lot of work from a discrimination standpoint to be able to identify what is and isn’t a threat. This ability allows an operator to confirm that a threat is real and take the necessary action.

As mentioned earlier, the other tactic adversaries are using is deploying more than just one – and maybe you deploy smaller, lower-cost stuff out in front, and then the bigger UASs with larger capabilities behind it. There’s this contested environment out there with a bunch of clutter, so we continue to evolve and improve the radar’s capability to be able to discriminate within that.

DN: You’ve previously mentioned the importance of tracking these small UASs. Could you explain the role of tracking in the counter-UAS process and the significance of that? Also, what are the primary detection and tracking technologies, and how those have evolved to keep up with the emerging UAS threats?

AG: Our primary radar, from a counter-UAS mission standpoint, is obviously the KuRFS radar. We’ve got a couple different variants of it: one that supports the fixed site emplacement, and then a variant that supports mobile. The mobile is obviously smaller and doesn’t have the detection range of the larger KuRFS, but has the same capability from a precision standpoint. Both are persistent, 360-degree radars that use an AESA technology and provides that discrimination of being able to identify threats. The other thing that’s really important about this mission is not just tracking and identification – it’s maintaining track.

You can imagine seeing something at a certain range and losing it, bringing it back, losing it, bringing it back – it has an effect on the mission set, and an effect on being able to defeat that threat. KuRFS continues to demonstrate exceptional performance at maintaining tracks on targets. There are also false alarms. KuRFS is best in class for its minimal false alarms – we’re really low from a false alarm standpoint. And I will add, KuRFS was originally developed for counter-RAM, which is counter rockets, artillery and mortar. So, you’re talking about really small projectiles going at really fast speeds. We have the ability with our radar to track an incoming nine-millimeter bullet. So, when we talk about really small, that’s what we’re talking about. And it’s being in that Ku-band frequency that allows us to be able to pick up those really small targets.

DN: That’s very impressive. You’ve touched on this a bit already, but could you discuss more about the effectiveness of counter-UAS systems?

AG: So, there are a number of systems that exist today. You can talk about the traditional air defense with kinetic capabilities like a LIDS system that we’ve been working with the U.S. Army for over the last six-plus years, where you’ve got a traditional radar and command and control. You’ve got an EO/IR camera to do positive ID visually, and then you’ve got a kinetic effector, or essentially a ground-to-air missile – Coyote. For us, we believe that’s the traditional ground-based CUAS capability with innovative technologies to be able to combat this threat.

We talk about maturity and being battle-proven, and the Army has recognized this. Major General Gainey, director for the Joint Counter-UAS Office, commented at the annual AUSA conference that LIDS with Coyote is the signature counter-UAS capability that the Army has today.

But there are also a number of non-kinetic type of things that exist out there as well. You’ve got electronic warfare jammers, high-powered microwaves, high-energy lasers. What we have seen is their capability against the UAS threat also seems to be working very well.

DN: Let’s discuss how CUAS systems are keeping up with tactical changes, as the UASs are changing so rapidly themselves. Is it possible to keep up with tactical changes given the flexibility of UASs?

AG: To the question “Is it possible?” My answer is yes. Over the last few years, we’ve developed and evolved our capability to stay ahead of the UAS threat. We take the information we’ve gained, lessons we’ve learned from how UASs are being deployed, and feedback from the soldiers operating our systems to influence capability improvements. Then we demonstrate those at a capabilities and limitations test every year out at Yuma Proving Grounds, usually in the summer. The Army essentially goes and proves that the capabilities we’ve developed are effective. We do the analysis upfront to go understand what capabilities we need to stay ahead of this threat – and so I believe we have proven it is possible.

Space and missile defense is rife with new challenges, as both near-peer adversaries and rogue states push forward on new technologies such as hypersonics and offensive capabilities in space. To defend against these challenges, U.S. forces must have both the technology and the people needed to build effective defenses against both today’s threats and those coming in the near future. That means building and shoring up the missile defense infrastructure to be able to identify, track and destroy threats before they can slip through defenses. In this webcast, Defense News editorial staff interviewed Laura DeSimone, executive director, Missile Defense Agency, on the current state of SMD, as well as the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.

Watch Recording:

Guest Speakers:

• Laura DeSimone, Executive Director, Missile Defense Agency, Department of Defense
• Jennifer Hubbard, President, Strategic Missile Defense, Raytheon, an RTX business

A combination of speed — hypersonics can exceed Mach 5, or five times the speed of sound — maneuverability and flexibility means that hypersonics break the old rules of both missile defense and offense. Detecting, identifying and killing a missile that can nimbly maneuver at such high speeds creates a number of challenges when it comes to developing a good defensive plan. While maneuverable missiles have existed for quite some time, the speed of hypersonics adds a new dimension to how they can be used to attack targets.

But creating such a weapon is a major engineering challenge, and finding the right people is a top priority for the industry. In this Q&A, Raytheon’s Nate Szyba, hypersonic attack cruise missile program director, shares insights on the development of hypersonics, a recent contract award for development of the hypersonic attack cruise missile, and the importance of both people and partnerships in turning the program into a reality.

The transcript of this interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Defense News (DN): This is emerging technology, there’s still a lot to be discovered, but what are the skill sets that you need, from a personnel standpoint, to be able to make those discoveries and to be able to really push this program forward?

Nate Szyba (NS): Demand for quality engineers is definitely one of the top priorities for hypersonic programs. You see a lot of discussion on “we need hypersonics engineers.” And while that’s true, when you look at a program that’s developing hypersonic technologies, there are components that are really focused on the hypersonics aspect of it, such as the aerodynamics, the propulsion, and all the thermal-structural behavior. But then, there’s also a very large component of the program that is very similar to the stuff that we’ve been developing for years. So, we do need hypersonics engineers, but we also need more traditional engineers as well. We can put them all to work on this type of program. Electrical, mechanical engineers are key as well.

And I would also say that highly specialized engineers are very useful to us. But what I also value is engineers that have a broad systems understanding across the technologies within hypersonics and beyond, because everything that we do in hypersonics becomes very interrelated.

DN: That’s a really interesting point. You talk about the specialized engineers are great, but you also need just people with good solid engineering competencies. So, how do you define who you need for what roles? Or is it really just looking at, “OK, this person’s a really good mechanical engineer, so we can find a spot for them in the development of this program”?

NS: I’d say that is certainly true. We definitely want skilled engineers. And if somebody is, say, a mechanical engineer, we’ll start putting them to work as a mechanical engineer. And then, what happens naturally is it broadens because you have to interact with all the other different fields. Having that experience and, I guess, just acknowledgement that it is a cross-disciplinary field help from the get go, but it also happens naturally as you execute on one of these programs; you have to be able to be someone that steps outside of your boundaries.

DN: As an offshoot of that, what are the main engineering challenges that you’re facing? What are the big problems that you’re looking at and saying, “OK. How do we crack this one?”

NS: There are many of them. I would say material systems and processes is a key one. We have folks that are developing brand new materials in some cases. We can develop some components at a small rate today. So, we’re still learning exactly how all those materials work together. And also, more importantly, we’re still learning how we transition what we can build a handful of into something that we can build at a more reasonable rate.

DN: I’d like to talk a little bit about how you’re putting this into practice. Raytheon and Northrop Grumman were recently awarded the contract for the hypersonic attack cruise missile (HACM). What does that award mean for hypersonics development? How does that advance the cause here?

NS: The HACM program is a pretty substantial effort. It’s the first of its kind weapon that’s going to be fielded by the US Air Force. It’s really a sign that the Air Force is committed to developing these technologies. The Air Force has entrusted us with a tremendous responsibility, and we’ve talked earlier about how important it is, getting this system out in the field is critical for our war fighters. So, I’d say it’s a show of confidence that this technology has the ability to work on these systems to do the mission, and it’s the commitment that we are going to add these capabilities that we need to, to turn this system into an actual weapon system for the Air Force.

I’d also add that it shows the partnership that we have between the United States and our Australian partners as well. And it’s demonstrating that we are building these international partnerships to develop hypersonic capability for all of our parties that are engaged.

DN: And as you mentioned there, this is a show of faith that, “OK, now, we’re putting this into practical use.” But what’s the next milestone we should be looking for?

NS: The next milestones that’ll be coming up will be design reviews leading up to our flight test program. So, those will be the next major steps in showing the design maturity that’ll start feeding into the flight testing that we’ll have later in the program.

DN: And then, as we look at the HACM itself, what are its main capabilities? What is it that really sets it apart from current weapons in the arsenal?

NS: It’s an air-launched cruise missile. It’s got a Scramjet engine that uses the vehicle speed to compress the incoming air, which enables the combustion and enables a sustained hypersonic speeds, which is Mach 5 or greater. And so, what that really does is reduces your flight time, your time to target gets smaller or more responsive to threats. We also increase the weapon’s survivability, the effectiveness and its flexibility. So, these are all aspects that make the weapon more effective, I would say. We like to also think of it as a force multiplier where if you can bring a couple of HACMs to the fight, that basically extends the capability that you already have into perhaps more areas that you wouldn’t otherwise be able to engage in.

DN: We’ve touched a little bit on partnerships, but I want to explore that a little bit more. These partnerships you’ve mentioned, what role are they playing in the development of hypersonics?

NS: We are going to be doing some of our flight testing in Australia. So, taking advantage of the capabilities that the Australian flight test ranges will have on the program is going to be key. Beyond Australia, there are other partnerships that I mentioned somewhat before, partnerships with universities, relationships that are more than necessarily just building the workforce that we need to support these systems. The infrastructure at some of the universities is key to demonstrating hypersonic capabilities too. The University of Arizona is developing some hypersonic wind tunnel capability that we’ve been very closely involved in, which enables us to capture the data that we need on the ground to flesh out these technologies before we go and do the tests in the air, which is much more expensive. The more we can do on the ground, the better off we’ll be later on when we get to fight too.

We also collaborate with the Joint Hypersonic Technology Office out of OSD and are working very closely with them on developing some of the key technologies that we’ll need for these systems, both today and in the future. So, we’re working across the industry and the universities and so forth. And all those partnerships are very critical because this is an extremely difficult problem that we’re trying to solve as a nation, and we’re all needing to work together to bring the knowledge that everyone has to best breed capabilities to develop these systems.

The advanced, adaptable, multi-mission radar made by Raytheon Missiles & Defense, a Raytheon Technologies business, is the U.S. Army’s ‘go-to’ sensor to find all classes of unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS, commonly called drones.

“KuRFS is tailor-made for the counter-UAS mission, and no other radar in the world does this mission as effectively,” said Will Strauss, technology director for short- and medium-range ground-based air defense programs at Raytheon Missiles & Defense.

Developed in partnership with the Army, the radar was originally built to help defeat rocket, artillery and mortar, or RAM, attacks in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. It was fielded in 2013 for a new mission – short-range air defense, or SHORAD, and it has surpassed 1.6 million operational hours.

Today, the Army operates nearly 60 KuRFS radars around the world, providing persistent 360-degree surveillance – detecting, tracking and discriminating airborne objects. Though it’s specifically used for SHORAD missions , KuRFS can see helicopters and planes up to and beyond 100 kilometers (62 miles).

Once KuRFS finds threats, it warns and cues defensive weapons to intercept them using kinetic effectors and non-kinetic engagement such as directed energy. Its ability to detect threats from long distances gives soldiers stand-off distance for safety and ample time to make an engagement decision.

And it keeps getting better. KuRFS continues to evolve to stay ahead of threats. Raytheon Missiles & Defense works closely with the Army to update and sustain the system for reliable performance and readiness in all environments where they operate.

Evolves with threats

Adversarial drones are a proliferating threat – a relatively low-cost tool for conducting intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and attack missions against critical assets and forces around the globe. Because they are readily available, these hostile vehicles’ capabilities and tactics are quickly evolving.

“Adversaries are spending less time making their drones resistant to attack,” Strauss said. “They’re more focused on creating a wide variety of low-cost drones – from very small and slow UASs to larger and slightly faster ones. But KuRFS can detect all of them.”

In fact, it’s specifically designed for a changing threat environment.

“From the ground up, KuRFS is an agile and scalable digital sensor, continually able to adapt to the evolving and most challenging SHORAD threats,” said Don Williams, Requirements and Capabilities director for SHORAD programs at RMD.

While KuRFS started out as a sense-and-warn radar, its precision targeting capabilities and reliable performance have made it highly effective for expanded missions, such as air surveillance, counter-RAM and now, counter-UAS.

Sees through clutter

KuRFS uses active electronically scanned array, or AESA, technology that enables exact steering of its beam toward a threat. The radar owes its precise sensing and fire control to its operation on the Ku-band of the electromagnetic spectrum.

The Ku band’s short wavelengths produce significantly sharper image resolution than other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, and it enables the KuRFS radar to tell the difference between many small objects at once. It can even see and identify an incoming 9 mm bullet.

That makes it optimal for picking small UAS out of a group of objects or clutter.

“The wave doesn’t get lost or degrade the farther out it searches,” Williams said.

The KuRFS radar is not large, but it’s big on benefits. Mounted on a pallet, the system is almost four feet in diameter. On a vehicle, it’s about three feet. And, in a distributed configuration, each aperture mounted on the four corners of a vehicle are about 20 inches square.

“KuRFS bolsters a layered defense by ensuring efficient and low-cost SHORAD operations. Warfighters can take it wherever they go, with confidence that the radar is up to the mission,” Williams said. “Even as adversaries adapt from a single-threat environment to multiples to highly integrated swarms of drones, KuRFS meets that challenge.”

Meets many missions

KuRFS is integrated with more than 15 weapon systems, including Raytheon Missile & Defense’s land-based Phalanx weapon system, Coyote family of effectors and Phaser high-power microwave, as well as HELWS, a high-energy laser weapon system made by Raytheon Intelligence & Space, also a Raytheon Technologies business. KuRFS is integrated with the Forward Area Air Defense Command and Control system for the Army’s SHORAD system. And the radar also provides the cueing data for 50-caliber guns and 30mm cannons.

For counter-UAS engagements, KuRFS gives the Coyote effector superior sensing capability against a broad set of UAS threats over a long range, detecting even the smallest class of drones out beyond 15 kilometers.

“It provides the operator of any system it’s integrated with flexibility and a clear, accurate vision for quick decision-making to defeat a threat target,” Strauss said.

KuRFS can also be deployed to stand sentry by itself in a “sense-and-warn” mission, “so that if a base is under attack, the radar gives troops enough time to seek cover,” Strauss said.

Weaves a digital thread

Digital technologies, such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, play a key role in KuRFS’ capacity to outpace current and future threats. Engineers use digital engineering in every stage of the sensor’s lifecycle, from design to production to sustainment. It not only supports the rapid deployment of new capabilities, like software upgrades, but also helps inform performance assessments through modeling and simulation as well as verification that systems meet customer requirements.

“We’ve always used cutting-edge design techniques for AESA radars, and our digital modeling of each system covers almost all the disciplines – from mechanical, thermal, stress, electrical and RF to sustainment and human factors,” Strauss said.

Digital engineering allows Raytheon Missiles & Defense to collaborate with the Army in real time, moving faster to bring together better ideas, designs and capability.

“Together, we’re continuing the evolution of KuRFS, updating it and adding new capabilities to enhance its performance, increase reliability and cut costs. All this helps keep us ahead of advanced adversarial techniques,” Strauss said.

Learn more about KuRFS.

Due to their size and maneuverability, they are hard to detect and track. They are low cost and the fact that they can be built or modified using commercial off-the-shelf hardware makes them expendable. And if a pilot is sitting miles — or hundreds, or even thousands of miles — away, then there is no risk to them even if the UAS is destroyed.

All of those things add up to UASs quickly becoming a common part of the arsenal for militaries and non-military groups alike. That means technology and a counter unmanned aircraft systems (CUAS) strategy to meet the threat of UAS attacks is critical on the modern battlefield.

To learn more about CUAS, Defense News spoke with Abel Ghanooni, Senior Director of Short Range Air Defense and Rapid Development Programs, Raytheon Missiles & Defense. Ghanooni leads the company’s Counter-UAS portfolio, including the KuRFS radar and Coyote missile programs.

The transcript of this conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Defense News (DN): Abel, we keep seeing these threats from unmanned aircraft systems. They’re becoming more and more common. So what is it about CUAS that makes it so important on today’s modernized battlefield?

Abel Ghanooni (AG): We’ve seen the proliferation of these small UASs over a number of years; however, I think it’s just becoming more prevalent in the news over the last few years. We’ve been working with the Army in developing capabilities to counter this challenging threat. The reason why we’re kind of seeing this proliferating is primarily because of the ease of getting access to these small UASs — they’re low cost, and easily built by hand. So because of that, they’re being used by the adversaries, both OCONUS (outside the continental U.S.), and even CONUS more and more.

There’s a huge importance on being able to neutralize these threats. In addition to the ease of access and ease of use, they’re really difficult to see. They’re small, they can blend in with the biologicals like birds or things of that size, they are slow-moving, fly low and are very maneuverable. In the development of our capabilities, one of the critical things was a highly-effective sensor to be able to see them. Our KuRFS radar is a very precise radar, originally designed for the Counter-RAM mission, which is a very difficult mission in itself.

KuRFS was designed to be able to see very small things, see through clutter, be able to detect, and identify these small threats. Also critical, it is able to discriminate whether it’s a biological or non-biological, to determine that it’s a manmade threat. With that first line of defense, the next step is to be able to combat these threats.

DN: As you mentioned there, they’re the ideal tool for a stealthy attack. They’re very small, they’re hard to detect on radar, they’re cheap, and you aren’t putting a person at risk. So it really is a perfect storm of, ‘we’ve got to figure out a way to effectively stop these things because they open up so many more options for attacks,’ isn’t it?

AG: The contested airspace has changed with these small UAVs, which are now integrated and involved in that air picture. Like you mentioned, they’re easily accessible, and as we are gathering intelligence, we’re learning new things on the way they’re being used. They can fly low, they can hover, they can blend into certain areas and certain scenarios, which really requires you to need a specific radar to be able to first see them, identify them as a threat, and then be able to track them.

DN: So when you want to be able to do that, what technologies are involved here? What are the characteristics of a good CUAS system?

AG: First and foremost, you have to be able to see it and you have to keep track on it, and then you have to identify it as, is it a hostile or not a hostile? Is there a biological or non-biological? You also want to be able to see it a longer ranges to provide more time for the operator and decision maker to decide on what type of effect to use. KuRFS is best in class with regards to detecting these small UAS threats. Once you do that, that’s just the first part of the kill chain: detect and ID. Now you have to track it and make sure you keep track on it. What we’re seeing and what we have seen with other radars in this specific class is they might be able to see it, but then potentially lose track. Or there’re things called false alarms where you might see one and then another one pops up, but it’s not a real one. The one great thing about the KuRFS radar is it’s very precise, it’s 360 degrees, and so it has the ability to detect at long ranges, ID, keep track, and then the next step is, now how do you take it down?

There are multiple ways of taking it down. You can use a kinetic effector, like the Coyote Block 2, which goes out to farther ranges in this specific mission compared to other effects, and defeats the threat before it gets close enough to do any harm. And when I say other effects, you can look at electronic warfare (EW), so you can jam it, or you could look at what we have with Raytheon Intelligence and Space’s High-Energy Laser. RIS, in concert with the U.S. Air Force, developed and deployed a 10-kilowatt and a 15-kilowatt system. Recently, they have been working with the Army to build and deliver a 50-kilowatt laser integrated on a Stryker vehicle called DE-MSHORAD. In simplistic terminology, basically you put a lot of energy on a specific spot of the threat where it’s most vulnerable to take it down.

DN: We’ve talked a lot about how quickly this has changed and become more common, but as you look forward, what’s the next evolution of CUAS? How do you see it changing as we adapt to some of these threats and prepare for new threats that we just don’t know about right now?

AG: I think the next evolution includes continuous development to mature, advance and adapt solutions as well as driving down cost. Cost is a big player in this game. We talked about it, availability of these small UASs at a low cost point makes them appealing to our adversaries. You don’t need or want to expend a sophisticated or expensive missile to down a thousand-dollar drone. And so constantly looking at lower-cost methods or ways of taking down these threats is paramount. I truly believe, you’re always going to need a kinetic effector for this mission space as part of the front end of the layered defense. EW has effects, but these technologies will also need to continuously evolve as the threats evolve because they could potentially figure out ways how to get around the EW effectors. That’s where the mix of effectors is key. It’s very difficult to get around something that goes “boom.” And so in my eyes, I see evolution continuing on both types of effectors. On the kinetic effectors, more development or upgrades to our Coyote Block 2, and potentially a development of a new missile as we see differing requirements, or new improved requirements, to combat the threat maybe five to 10 years from now.

DN: It’s funny how often the answer to some really smart technological attack is ‘hit it with something dumb.’ Like you mentioned, the kinetic weapon is always going to be there because the others can be interfered with, but that really can’t.

AG: Right. When you talk about the non-kinetic stuff that’s matured very quickly over the last couple years and things that maybe a decade ago everyone thought was the future and it was never going to get here, and now it’s here. We talked about directed energy, high-powered microwave, high-energy lasers, kudos to those folks and those teams that have made them a reality. Like all counter-effects, these technologies will continue to evolve to safeguard against efforts to find ways to evade or fortify against those. But you have something that’s kinetic in the mix of defenses, an effector that essentially has a warhead with fragments that can take these things down, it’s very difficult to combat something like that. At the end of the day, we talk about layered defense of the UAS threat, where you have multiple different kinetic and non-kinetic effectors integrated as a single system of systems, since there isn’t one single bullet or way to defend against this complex and challenging threat set.

Modern cruise missiles don’t fly a static trajectory. Unmanned aerial vehicles can be piloted by a human thousands of miles away. Hypersonics reach speeds that can put them within striking distance before a radar system can report them as anything other than a blob on a screen.

Those threats require a radar system robust enough to deal with traditional threats as well as those that are more agile, faster and able to attack from unexpected vectors. The Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS) —— is designed to offer full 360-degree scanning without the blind spots created by a traditional rotating radar.

In this Q&A, Defense News spoke with Bob Kelley, Director, US Requirements and Capabilities for Land Warfare and Air Defense, Raytheon Missiles & Defense. Kelley shared his insights on the changing nature of aerial warfare, what LTAMDS provides and how it will change defense.

The transcript of this conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Defense News (DN): The big, first question that comes to mind is what does LTAMDS do that our current existing radar systems don’t do? What’s the argument for “this is why we need this system right now”?

Bob Kelley (BK): It’s a combination of increased velocity, increased maneuverability and sophisticated employment techniques. In September of 2019, there was an attack on a Saudi oil refinery. They had air defenses protecting that Saudi oil refinery. But this attack was sophisticated in that it was simultaneous 360 with multiple threats flying multiple trajectories, but all at the same target. You had a combination of cruise missiles and unmanned aerial systems that were in real time, near simultaneously coming in, in full 360.

That drives you to the understanding that the battlefield is no longer linear. Cruise missiles today, they are limited only by the amount of fuel that you put on them and how far they can fly. They can fly any trajectory. At least a modern cruise missile can fly any trajectory that your potential enemies want it to fly, which means even if the enemy’s directly in front of you, they can fly in a manner that makes it come around outside of your radar detection areas and ingress into the rear of whatever you’re protecting. You need to have a 360-degree capability against these types of threats and it needs to be simultaneous 360.

Our big part was that nothing goes unseen because we are looking in full 360 degrees simultaneously all the time, doing search, detection, tracking, classification, discrimination, identification and interceptor support for engagements all the time in all directions.

DN: As you mentioned, there are so many different possible threat vectors and angles of attack, and the ability to steer cruise missiles instead of just fire and forget, you have to have that 360-degree capability if you really want to have a comprehensive protection, don’t you?

BK: Yeah. The other part is range, right? You’ve got to extend the range. But when you look at some of the velocities that some of these threats are getting to, particularly hypersonics, to have enough time to compute an engagement sequence for a threat like that, you’ve got to detect it pretty far out if you want to have some kind of a standoff range where you’re going to do some engagement. So that was the other part of it, too. 360 and we had to increase the range.

DN: So then when we think about this as the next evolution of missile defense, from what you said, it sounds like this is a big leap forward instead of a small incremental step. Is that accurate?

BK: That is accurate. I would say that’s what we’ve done with Patriot for years. There are people around the world that are in fighting shooting wars today with Patriot, and it’s being very, very successful. But this is a leap ahead technology really over other radars because of the increased ranges that we have, because of the 360, but also because of the technology that went into it.

This is an AESA (active electronically scanned array) radar powered by GaN (Gallium nitride) technology. With a radar, one of the biggest challenges is “I’ve got a fixed amount of input power that’s coming into the radar, and I want to transition as much of that power as I can into RF energy going out the front of the radar, or in this case, going out 360 degrees from the radar.” Well, GaN is incredibly efficient with that.

DN: With the capabilities of LTAMDS, do you expect a change to how we think about missile defense?

BK: In today’s environment, you’re looking at an aerial threat set that is beyond missile defense. So when I think missile defense today, for the most part, I’m thinking very strategic homeland defense. I would say that the changes, unless I’m just focused on an intercontinental ballistic missile, I have to have systems on the battlefield that can handle the multitude of aerial threats that are out there. I can’t have the stove-piped system that only does missiles.

The goal is because current air and missile defense systems are so good, adversaries want to overwhelm the radar and the operator. If they can have more objects than your radar can handle or your operator can understand, then that’s how they feel like they’ll be successful. So we look at it as a layered defense, and you want to have radars that support a layered defense against manned/unmanned aircraft; small, slow unmanned aerial systems; cruise missiles; ballistic missiles.

It’s funny, the term ballistic missiles gets used a lot. Most of them are not ballistic anymore. They do not fly a ballistic trajectory. Ballistic missiles are not the biggest challenge in the world to shoot down. It’s when they don’t fly ballistically that they become more of a challenge.

Its roots go back three decades, but today’s AMRAAM missile is vastly different from its predecessors, thanks to multiple updates of its hardware and software.

“The AMRAAM missile is arguably the most sophisticated air-to-air weapon in use today and for good reason. It has to be in order to address the complex threats we’re seeing from our adversaries,” said Paul Ferraro, president of Air Power for Raytheon Missiles & Defense, a Raytheon Technologies business.

Here’s how this advanced medium-range missile built by Raytheon Missiles & Defense helps militaries dominate the skies.

Every test makes the next version better.

The AMRAAM missile has been test fired more than 5,000 times and used in combat all over the world. The tests often contribute to the next update, improving aspects such as its range, its GPS navigation or its two-way data link.

“From those test shots, we get real-time data that we feed into digital models to see how the system stacks up against new or evolving threats,” said Steve Dickman, executive director for Air Dominance at Raytheon Missiles & Defense.

In use by 41 nations, the AMRAAM missile is flying on the F-15C Eagle and F-15E Strike Eagle, F-16 Fighting Falcon, F/A-18 C/D Hornet and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, F-22 Raptor, Eurofighter Typhoon, JAS-39 Gripen, Panavia Tornado and Harrier Jump Jet. It is also the only air-to-air missile qualified on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

And each platform has its own customized version of AMRAAM.

“As a platform evolves, we adapt the system to that new platform and take advantage of what’s available from missile performance to bring additional capability to that platform,” Dickman said.

One example is the latest firing of AMRAAM off the U.S. Air Force’s new F-15 fighter jet, the F-15 EX Eagle II.

“It was one of those really long-range shots which is a new capability we’re starting to stress the weapon system with,” Dickman said.

It keeps pace with advanced threats.

Raytheon Missiles & Defense is driving new capability into the AMRAAM missile with F3R, or form, fit and function refresh, using modeling to design, analyze, verify and validate the system. The F3R missile will have improved guidance circuitry and software to address rapidly evolving threats.

“We’re upgrading the GPS and inertial navigation system to be more accurate, and it will be able to discern and work through tough threat scenarios faster,” Dickman said.

The business and the U.S. Air Force have completed the first in a series of guided live-fire tests for F3R, moving it one step closer to Initial Operational Capability – the military’s way of saying it is ready to deploy.

AMRAAM F3R

It’s a perfect pairing of hardware and software.

In lockstep with F3R, the system is getting additional capability with software updates known as System Improvement Program-3, or SIP-3, to improve the weapon’s guidance, range and performance.

Raytheon Missiles & Defense is using model-based systems engineering to integrate F3R hardware with SIP-3 software – the result: SIP-3F.

“The performance (of SIP-3F) – as one of our very senior engineers will gladly tell you – is eye-watering in his view,” Dickman said. “It’s playing out the way we thought it would.”

And the advancements don’t stop there. The AMRAAM missile is getting better with SIP-4, which is “really when all the pieces start to come together,” Dickman said. “It (SIP-4) takes full advantage of the new processing power and speed that the new hardware brings.”

The business will leverage the agile development process to help bring the SIP-4 capability to fruition by 2025.

It has extra battery power to fly farther.

Raytheon Missiles & Defense designed and built the AMRAAM missile to certain specifications, but left room for it to do more. One of those margins is extra battery life, which allows users to drive the missile farther, a capability known as Extended Time of Flight, or ETOF.

“It’s harvesting capability that’s already resident in the missile,” Dickman said. “It’s taking today’s hardware and seeing how we can stress it … how long can it operate, how far can it go, how long will it take to get there.”

It’s more than an air-to-air missile.

The AMRAAM-Extended Range missile will be integrated with the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile launcher, also called NASAMS, a medium-range air defense system.

In 2022, AMRAAM-ER passed an audit that demonstrated the missile meets the requirements and that the design is ready for production.

The new weapon’s maximum range is 50 percent longer than the standard version, and its maximum altitude is 70 percent higher, thanks to enhancements like an enlarged rocket motor built by Norwegian company NAMMO. Work is underway with NAMMO and KONGSBERG Defence & Aerospace on the AMRAAM-E2 variant that will have an improved rocket motor and a new control actuation system.

New versions are in development.

The AMRAAM-ER and AMRAAM-E2 efforts open the door for more modernization like the AMRAAM Air-launched Extended Envelope, or AXE, which will deliver a boost in range and speed to target.

“Because of the existing work being done on these two systems, we see this as a capability we could field in short order to address the emerging threat,” Dickman said.

Learn more about AMRAAM.

The U.S. space and missile defense community’s challenge is simple: stay ahead of the threat from nations such as China, North Korea and Russia. Across the Department of Defense, leaders are adapting existing systems to better counter the current threat, moving forward on major programs of record that improve nearly every element of the kill chain, and investing in next-generation technologies, such as radars, hypersonics and counter technologies. The goal is to be prepared for both current and emerging threats, ranging from ballistic missile tests by North Korea to threats to satellites from China and Russia. In this webcast, Defense News examined the current state of missile defense, emerging threats in the near future and the long-term needs for effective space and missile defense.

Watch Recording:

Guest Speakers:

• Vice Adm. Jon A. Hill, Director, Missile Defense Agency, Department of Defense
• Tay Fitzgerald, President, Strategic Missile Defense, Raytheon Missiles & Defense

***

In the Arizona desert, drones flew across the summer skies, alone and in swarms. They represented what the U.S. Army has identified as a critical problem: the proliferation of unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS, and the cost of defeating them with traditional defense systems.

At the Yuma Proving Ground, Counter-UAS team members from Raytheon Missiles & Defense, a Raytheon Technologies business, gathered alongside their partners from the Army’s Integrated Fires and Rapid Capabilities Office as well as representatives from international partner nations. At the 10-day test event in August 2021, they all watched as Coyote® interceptor variants, the KuRFS precision targeting radar and the Ku-720 mobile precision targeting radar – all Raytheon Missiles & Defense products – were put through their paces.

The task: to detect and defeat all Group 1 – 3 drones – individual and multiples – of various sizes, ranges and maneuverability.

The result: success.

Pivotal partnership

Both the Ku-Band Radio Frequency System, or KuRFS, and the kinetic-defeat Coyote interceptor have been deployed under what the Army calls Urgent Operational Needs programs, meaning those that are demonstrated as effective against a range of threats and are fielded faster.

As part of a longtime partnership with the Army, Raytheon Missiles & Defense has continued to mature the KuRFS fixed-site and Ku720 mobile radars and the Coyote interceptors to serve a greater number of warfighters across Combatant Commands and the branches of the Armed Forces.

“Being able to demonstrate the Ku-720, especially the benefits of its mobility, has been the result of a years-long collaboration with the U.S. government customer,” said Sam Deneke, the company’s vice president of business execution for Land Warfare & Air Defense. “It’s not an exaggeration to say that this program would not have come nearly as far or as fast if the Army’s Integrated Fires and Rapid Capabilities Office was not a tremendous partner, coming at it from a collaborative viewpoint.”

Defense in depth

Adversaries have shown they can use drones to carry out complex, synchronized attacks, making it increasingly crucial to address the proliferating threat they pose to military and civilian installations. “It’s less about the capabilities of the drones themselves, although certainly they are evolving, but it’s about the evolution of UAS tactics,” Deneke said.

These days, those tactics can overwhelm a singular defensive system. Therefore, Raytheon Missiles & Defense takes a “defense-in-depth” approach – building counter-UAS systems in layers to ensure integrated defense against drones in any environment.

As a scaled down version of KuRFS, Ku-720 is specifically designed for highly mobile operations. It reduces the size, weight and cost of the currently deployed KuRFS, while retaining its same proven technology for surveillance, threat detection, identification and tracking.

KuRFS’ high-resolution imaging enables it to quickly pick up the track of airborne threats launched at close to medium ranges. The radar sees across a full 360 degrees, identifies threats with precision and cues defensive weapons accordingly.

“KuRFS is an outstanding radar that that we’ve developed, also in tandem with the same army customer,” Deneke said. “As the fire control source, it provides situational awareness and queueing for the Coyote effectors, or interceptors.”

The summer 2021 test period also accomplished several key milestones for Coyote interceptor variants. The Coyote Block 2 defeated threats at longer ranges and higher altitudes than similar class effectors, gaining U.S. Army approval for deployment. Using its upgraded subsystems, it responded more quickly and with increased lethality against Group 1-3 UAS threats.

Meanwhile, the non-kinetic Coyote Block 3 interceptor was approved for an overseas operational assessment, after demonstrating its fully integrated system-of-system capabilities at extended ranges. It was effective against multiple Group 1-3 UAS threats and was retrieved, refurbished and reused during the same test period.

These accomplishments would not have been possible, Deneke said, without the partnership between Raytheon Missiles & Defense and the U.S. Army’s Integrated Fires and Rapid Capabilities Office: “Working hand-in-hand to quickly develop this customizable technology, and doing so in this timeframe, on both Coyote Block 2 and Block 3, is unrivaled.”

A step ahead

“Together with our Army partners, we showcased the maturity and lethality of our Counter-UAS systems against single and multiple drone threats to both U.S. and international customers,” said Abel Ghanooni, senior director for Short Range Air Defense and Rapid Development Programs at Raytheon Missiles & Defense. “These tests move us closer to deploying Coyote and Ku-720 globally so they can protect service members and critical assets from enemy drones.”

Deneke added that the company’s counter-UAS team is “continuing to work with the U.S. Army to evolve our capabilities and systems. We have to anticipate where the technology and tactics are going and be tremendously prepared to ensure that we’re a step ahead of any potential adversaries at all times.”

Learn more about Raytheon Missiles & Defense’s counter-UAS capabilities.